Simon's and Siegel's responses to the 'mixed strategy anomaly': a missed case in the sensitivity of economics to empirical evidence
AbstractIn some of their papers published in the 1950s, Herbert Simon and Sidney Siegel responded to the so-called mixed strategy anomaly in ways which deserve more attention. They produced not only (i) immediate defences of the economic theory of their own time, but also (ii) ideas and solutions that have later turned out to be significant contributions to the development of the economic theory of choice and decision-making and the separation of experimental economics from experimental psychology. These observations suggest that economics can be more responsive to empirical anomalies than has been assumed. Furthermore, knowledge of the desirable responsiveness to anomalies can provide means of avoiding the non-desirable immunity to anomalies. Copyright 2003, Oxford University Press.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Oxford University Press in its journal Cambridge Journal of Economics.
Volume (Year): 27 (2003)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://www.cje.oupjournals.org/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.